Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Page 1 of 4
In her answer dated 19 August 1994, herein petitioner Natcher averred that she Section 3, Rule 1 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure defines civil action and
was legally married to Graciano in 20 March 1980 and thus, under the law, she special proceedings, in this wise:
was likewise considered a compulsory heir of the latter. Petitioner further alleged
that during Graciano's lifetime, Graciano already distributed, in advance, properties "XXX a) A civil action is one by which a party sues another for the
to his children, hence, herein private respondents may not anymore claim against enforcement or protection of a right, or the prevention or redress of a
Graciano's estate or against herein petitioner's property. wrong.
After trial, the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 55, rendered a decision dated "A civil action may either be ordinary or special. Both are government by
26 January 1996 holding:8 the rules for ordinary civil actions, subject to specific rules prescribed for a
special civil action.
"1) The deed of sale executed by the late Graciano del Rosario in favor of
Patricia Natcher is prohibited by law and thus a complete nullity. There "XXX
being no evidence that a separation of property was agreed upon in the
marriage settlements or that there has been decreed a judicial separation "c) A special proceeding is a remedy by which a party seeks to establish a
of property between them, the spouses are prohibited from entering (into) status, a right or a particular fact."
a contract of sale;
As could be gleaned from the foregoing, there lies a marked distinction between an
"2) The deed as sale cannot be likewise regarded as a valid donation as it action and a special proceeding. An action is a formal demand of one's right in a
was equally prohibited by law under Article 133 of the New Civil Code; court of justice in the manner prescribed by the court or by the law. It is the method
of applying legal remedies according to definite established rules. The term
"3) Although the deed of sale cannot be regarded as such or as a "special proceeding" may be defined as an application or proceeding to establish
donation, it may however be regarded as an extension of advance the status or right of a party, or a particular fact. Usually, in special proceedings, no
inheritance of Patricia Natcher being a compulsory heir of the deceased." formal pleadings are required unless the statute expressly so provides. In special
proceedings, the remedy is granted generally upon an application or motion." 9
On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed and set aside the lower court's decision
ratiocinating, inter alia: Citing American Jurisprudence, a noted authority in Remedial Law expounds
further:
"It is the probate court that has exclusive jurisdiction to make a just and
legal distribution of the estate. The court a quo, trying an ordinary action "It may accordingly be stated generally that actions include those
for reconveyance / annulment of title, went beyond its jurisdiction when it proceedings which are instituted and prosecuted according to the ordinary
performed the acts proper only in a special proceeding for the settlement rules and provisions relating to actions at law or suits in equity, and that
of estate of a deceased person. XXX special proceedings include those proceedings which are not ordinary in
this sense, but is instituted and prosecuted according to some special
"X X X Thus the court a quo erred in regarding the subject property as mode as in the case of proceedings commenced without summons and
advance inheritance. What the court should have done was merely to rule prosecuted without regular pleadings, which are characteristics of ordinary
on the validity of (the) sale and leave the issue on advancement to be actions. XXX A special proceeding must therefore be in the nature of a
resolved in a separate proceeding instituted for that purpose. XXX" distinct and independent proceeding for particular relief, such as may be
instituted independently of a pending action, by petition or motion upon
Aggrieved, herein petitioner seeks refuge under our protective mantle through the notice."10
expediency of Rule 45 of the Rules of Court and assails the appellate court's
decision "for being contrary to law and the facts of the case." Applying these principles, an action for reconveyance and annulment of title with
damages is a civil action, whereas matters relating to settlement of the estate of a
We concur with the Court of Appeals and find no merit in the instant petition. deceased person such as advancement of property made by the decedent,
Page 2 of 4
partake of the nature of a special proceeding, which concomitantly requires the should be resolved by the Regional Trial Court (then Court of First Instance) in the
application of specific rules as provided for in the Rules of Court. exercise of its general jurisdiction or its limited probate jurisdiction is not a
jurisdictional issue but a mere question of procedure. In essence, it is procedural
Clearly, matters which involve settlement and distribution of the estate of the question involving a mode of practice "which may be waived". 15
decedent fall within the exclusive province of the probate court in the exercise of its
limited jurisdiction. Notwithstanding, we do not see any waiver on the part of herein private
respondents inasmuch as the six children of the decedent even assailed the
Thus, under Section 2, Rule 90 of the Rules of Court, questions as to authority of the trial court, acting in its general jurisdiction, to rule on this specific
advancement made or alleged to have been made by the deceased to any heir issue of advancement made by the decedent to petitioner.
may be heard and determined by the court having jurisdiction of the estate
proceedings; and the final order of the court thereon shall be binding on the Analogously, in a train of decisions, this Court has consistently enunciated the long
person raising the questions and on the heir. standing principle that although generally, a probate court may not decide a
question of title or ownership, yet if the interested parties are all heirs, or the
While it may be true that the Rules used the word "may", it is nevertheless clear question is one of collation or advancement, or the parties consent to the
that the same provision11 contemplates a probate court when it speaks of the assumption of jurisdiction by the probate court and the rights of third parties are
"court having jurisdiction of the estate proceedings". not impaired, then the probate court is competent to decide the question of
ownership.16
Corollarily, the Regional Trial Court in the instant case, acting in its general
jurisdiction, is devoid of authority to render an adjudication and resolve the issue of Similarly in Mendoza vs. Teh, we had occasion to hold:
advancement of the real property in favor of herein petitioner Natcher, inasmuch
as Civil Case No. 471075 for reconveyance and annulment of title with damages is "In the present suit, no settlement of estate is involved, but merely an
not, to our mind, the proper vehicle to thresh out said question. Moreover, under allegation seeking appointment as estate administratrix which does not
the present circumstances, the RTC of Manila, Branch 55 was not properly necessarily involve settlement of estate that would have invited the
constituted as a probate court so as to validly pass upon the question of exercise of the limited jurisdiction of a probate court. 17 (emphasis
advancement made by the decedent Graciano Del Rosario to his wife, herein supplied)
petitioner Natcher.
Of equal importance is that before any conclusion about the legal share due to a
At this point, the appellate court's disquisition is elucidating: compulsory heir may be reached, it is necessary that certain steps be taken first.
The net estate of the decedent must be ascertained, by deducting all payable
"Before a court can make a partition and distribution of the estate of a obligations and charges from the value of the property owned by the deceased at
deceased, it must first settle the estate in a special proceeding instituted the time of his death; then, all donations subject to collation would be added to it.
for the purpose. In the case at hand, the court a quo determined the With the partible estate thus determined, the legitime of the compulsory heir or
respective legitimes of the plaintiffs-appellants and assigned the subject heirs can be established; and only thereafter can it be ascertained whether or not a
property owned by the estate of the deceased to defendant-appellee donation had prejudiced the legitimes.19
without observing the proper proceedings provided (for) by the Rules of
Court. From the aforecited discussions, it is clear that trial courts trying an A perusal of the records, specifically the antecedents and proceedings in the
ordinary action cannot resolve to perform acts pertaining to a special present case, reveals that the trial court failed to observe established rules of
proceeding because it is subject to specific prescribed rules. Thus, the procedure governing the settlement of the estate of Graciano Del Rosario. This
court a quo erred in regarding the subject property as an advance Court sees no cogent reason to sanction the non-observance of these well-
inheritance."12 entrenched rules and hereby holds that under the prevailing circumstances, a
probate court, in the exercise of its limited jurisdiction, is indeed the best forum to
In resolving the case at bench, this Court is not unaware of our pronouncement ventilate and adjudge the issue of advancement as well as other related matters
in Coca vs. Borromeo13 and Mendoza vs. Teh14 that whether a particular matter involving the settlement of Graciano Del Rosario's estate.1âwphi1.nêt
Page 3 of 4
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the assailed decision of the Court of Appeals
is hereby AFFIRMED and the instant petition is DISMISSED for lack of merit.
SO ORDERED.
Page 4 of 4